Riots in Tottenham......

[DaveR]

The plod have massively stepped up the extent of their PR operations in recent years but, as *Bob* said, they're still not very good.

[Santerme]

So the answer is that the police have not said Duggan fired first.

What you have described is media hype, not fact.

[*Bob*]

Put your spectacles on and give the last part another read

"..A spokesman for the IPCC said he understood that Duggan had been shot by police, adding that an officer had been shot and wounded. "We understand the officer was shot first before the male was shot." It appears that the IPCC relied on the police sources for their information."

[LadyDeliah]

Don't want to say, "I told you so". But just can't help myself!

[Santerme]

I have perfect reading comprehension.

A reporter quoting an unnamed source....is not a fact, it is hearsay.

[*Bob*]

I guess you read it how you want to read it, but ultimately it doesn't even matter.

Whether the Police wilfully told porkies, or simply allowed a 'favourable account' of the incident to develop and spread throughout the meeja - by virtue of them *not* stopping it from happening - it matters not. It's a failure by them; by their communications department.

How such a huge, important and well-funded organisation such as The Met can be so imbecilic with regards to matters such as these is truly bizarre.

[ianr]

What we don't know is from what level within the police such possibly inaccurate snippets of information come from, how authorised or authoritative they were, or what apparatus there is within the police for disciplinary action against unauthorised or unchecked release of information. We do of course know of cases of information informally passing from police officers to journos or investigators.

I do remember a senior police officer stating that the police had never stated that Mr Duggan had fired a gun. Did the press get their pseudo-information from a police officer or the IPCC? How exactly did the IPCC arrive at their initial understanding and think it reliable enough to be published by their spokesman? An eventual answer to that question is needed.

[david_carnell]

LadyD - you told us so?! Really? God, I thought I was a patronising git sometimes. What's with your need to constantly defend the indefensible? It's like you can't see the wood for the trees.

Would you like to explain what he was doing with a gun in his car? That IS fact.

You carry a gun, you're going to get shot. Maybe not by the police, but by someone. Otherwise you wouldn't have one.

His family are saying it was for "protection". Why? Because he was a criminal. A drug dealer. Scum. That's the only reason you need a gun.

I'm not exactly mourning his loss. This isn't another De Menezies. Not even close.

[Jeremy]

It is pretty shocking that the early info from the police was so inaccurate, have they not learned anything from the past? It would probably be better if they just shut up, and released the facts when they become clear. Early reports from the officers present could be unreliable for all sorts of reasons.

[Jeremy]

david - my thoughts exactly. Let's not pretend he was an innocent victim.

[LadyDeliah]

Why do you still beleive the rest of the police spin?

Duggan had no criminal record, there is no evidence yet that the gun is his.

The 'fact' that he fired on the police has been shown to be total BS. Let's see if he was also dragged out of the car and pinned down before he was shot, as claimed by someone close to his family.

I told you that the police were not telling the truth. The fact that they failed to tell the truth caused the anger and resentment that resulted in the family and others protesting outside the police station. It was not a vigil, as claimed by some, it was a protest.

The actions by the police then sparked the worst civil disobedience seen in this country for decades.

How much of the shit being printed in the media, fed by police spin are you going to continue to swallow?

[Loz]

Also, from the Guardian:

"Mark Duggan was a member of the Star gang. Made up of less than 10 members, it had a notorious reputation for being armed, dealing Class A drugs and intent on making money. It was affiliated to larger, older gangs in the area known as the Tottenham Man Dem or the Farm Boys, with around 30 members each from different generations."

[david_carnell]

Oh I see....it's all a conspiracy against these poor gun-carrying criminals is it? And their criminal families (ever heard of aiding and abetting - you should have as a lawyer).

He was carrying a gun. Ergo he is a criminal. And a very dangerous one.

And the idea that police actions "sparked" disobedience is what gives liberals a bad name. What sparked this violence is nothing more than opportunist criminality. No right minded people were protesting against the police shooting a criminal.

[Santerme]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why do you still beleive the rest of the police

> spin?

>

> Duggan had no criminal record, there is no

> evidence yet that the gun is his.

>

> The 'fact' that he fired on the police has been

> shown to be total BS. Let's see if he was also

> dragged out of the car and pinned down before he

> was shot, as claimed by someone close to his

> family.

>

> I told you that the police were not telling the

> truth. The fact that they failed to tell the

> truth caused the anger and resentment that

> resulted in the family and others protesting

> outside the police station. It was not a vigil,

> as claimed by some, it was a protest.

>

> The actions by the police then sparked the worst

> civil disobedience seen in this country for

> decades.

>

> How much of the shit being printed in the media,

> fed by police spin are you going to continue to

> swallow?

I will wait for the truth.

My earnest suggestion is you do the same.

[LadyDeliah]

I wait with baited breath.

May be some time coming.

David, I thought better of you than that. Don't put words in my mouth (or words in my fingers?).

[pk]

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Oh I see....it's all a conspiracy against these

> poor gun-carrying criminals is it? And their

> criminal families (ever heard of aiding and

> abetting - you should have as a lawyer).

>

so what facts have you got re the family's actions? or even the dead man? how do you know he was a drug dealer? (you might have some, but i haven't seen them)

don't you have any sympathy for e.g. the children who have lost their father (assuming that they're not guilty of aiding and abetting too)?

[Huguenot]

I think you'd have to go to unreasonable lengths to suggest the type of man who totes a gun on minicab journeys was a pillar of the community.

I have a great deal of sympathy for children dragged into this world by the type of father who carries a gun on minicab journeys.

I pity the family suffering the trauma of a disaster created by the type of man who carries a gun on minicab journeys.

I have absolutely no doubt that this disaster was not the making of the police, but of the type of man who carries a gun on minicab journeys.

[pk]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think you'd have to go to unreasonable lengths

> to suggest the type of man who totes a gun on

> minicab journeys was a pillar of the community.

>

is anyone suggesting he was?

do pillars of the community get special rights around not being shot?

[Santerme]

No, the police shot a barrister a while ago.

[richardbach]

i was old a very funy this morning when somone said tey get flashbaks of nam and then they said vietnam and he said no teotenham

[BB100]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why do you still beleive the rest of the police

> spin?

>

> Duggan had no criminal record, there is no

> evidence yet that the gun is his.

>

> The 'fact' that he fired on the police has been

> shown to be total BS. Let's see if he was also

> dragged out of the car and pinned down before he

> was shot, as claimed by someone close to his

> family.

>

> I told you that the police were not telling the

> truth. The fact that they failed to tell the

> truth caused the anger and resentment that

> resulted in the family and others protesting

> outside the police station. It was not a vigil,

> as claimed by some, it was a protest.

>

> The actions by the police then sparked the worst

> civil disobedience seen in this country for

> decades.

FACT: He had a gun loaded with bullets. People that live by the gun should expect they may die by it.

Make no mistake it was the actions of the Duggan family turning up with protesters that set-up the dynamics for riots. Can't you see that if you have an angry group outside a police station that the police would be reluctant to say anything in case they get it wrong. Duggan had only just died, people need to understand that things like that take time to get answers, not all life is like fast-food takeaways.

[Fabricio the Guido]

On the one hand, everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, on the other, the police must exercise reasonable care and skill in discharging their duties and ensure that proportionate force is used according to the degree of risk a situation presents. The difficulty with proactive policing such as in the recent shooting incident is one gets the impression that the police do not strike the correct balance. It's a difficult job but if you cannot do it, you should not be out on the streets wielding violence on behalf of the realm. Not a single serving officer has been convicted of an offence related to a death in custody or death whilst under the supervision of the police. This leads to understandable concerns about our system of accountability in this country.

Authoritarian reactionaries don't appreciate nuances, the world is Manichean divide to them.

[Loz]

BB100 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> FACT: He had a gun loaded with bullets. People

> that live by the gun should expect they may die by

> it.

Whilst I sort of agree with this...

> Make no mistake it was the actions of the Duggan family turning up with protesters that set-up the

> dynamics for riots.

... I disagree with this. The Met were very poor in contacting the family - they've admitted as such. The family deserved some answers to some quite reasonable questions. They are not to blame for the riots.

[david_carnell]

Agreed Loz. But neither can these riots, even the ones in Tottenham, be attributed to anger at this death. That's nonsense.

[ianr]

I've just been looking through all the IPCC's press releases on Mark Duggan's shooting. http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/Pages/default.aspx

I've seen no mention there that Mr Duggan had fired a shot, that the non-police gun had been fired, or that any shots had been fired at the police.

I have seen mention of the appointment of a Family Liaison Manager on Friday, the day after his death, and several references to contacts with and support for members of Mr Duggan's family, the provison of contact details, and of contacts with community leaders.

There are several acknowledgements of the distress felt by Mr Duggan's family and of community concern. There are also requests for the ending of inflammatory and inaccurate speculations about his death. That of an 'execution' style assassination by shots to the head was on 7 August categorically stated to be untrue.

The Monday 8 August release includes:

"Following my meeting with the family yesterday (Sunday) I am very clear that their concerns were not about lack of contact or support from the IPCC. Their concerns were about lack of contact from the police in delivering news of his death to Mark?s parents. It is never the responsibility of the IPCC to deliver a message regarding someone's death and I have told Mr Duggan?s family that I would be addressing this issue with the Met and that, if necessary, this would become part of our investigation."